2.07.2008

Take your feel-goodery and shove it

So, I don't know if I've made it clear on here, but I don't like Barack Obama.


I don't like how he continually distances himself from the gay community, then tries to make it up by mentioning us on MLK Jr. Day. Plus, one of his spokesman is an anti-gay bigot. Way to pick 'em Barack!


I don't like that he is socially conservative.


His dust-up with my future ex-husband Gavin Newsom shows me exactly the type of politics he's playing--the kind that says, "I'll take your money, I just don't respect you."
Then, he hates the environment. I know, what you're thinking, he got a 97% positive review from some environmental agency that I can't source right now. Big whoop! His dedication to liquified coal is diametrically opposed to his energy plan. (But secretly what its really about is big business and if you didn't know it, Obama loves getting in on that noiz.)
And speaking of his energy plan. What a joke! Does he even have people who look at budgets construct his plans? There is no way Mr. Obama plans on balancing the budget. Four more years! (Of fiscal irresponsibility.)
So now we get to the real-deal, deal-breakers for me.
His health care plan is the sux. National Health Insurance Exchange? That idea is so awesome! It works so well in Massachusetts. That's why babies don't die in Boston, because everyone is insured. And I'd just like to bring up budget again--where the crap is he getting all this money? If Barack is actually able to accomplish what he says he can, we are looking at a future falling deeper and deeper into debt.
Now, let's talk war. Bring the troops home immediately, one or two brigades at a time. Super. Force a new constitution. Fine. Words, words. If he is as persuasive as he was with his arguments against the war, then Iraq will never have a new constitution. Hey, at least our troops will be home.
Now, seriously, go to the two sites.
Read what each has to say.
Tell me which one just sounds like pipe dreams and wishful thinking and which one sounds like they actually have a tangible plan.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

I've thought the same things as you, and still prefer Obama. (I've gone back and forth many times between the two). It worries me that he hasn't taken bold progressive stances. The New Yorker has this to say -

"Obama’s Democratic critics worry that his soaring rhetoric of reconciliation is na├»ve. But, as Mark Schmitt has argued in The American Prospect, Obama’s national-unity pitch should be viewed as a tactic as well as an ideal. It might lengthen his coattails, helping Democratic candidates for the House and the Senate in marginally red districts and states. It would not protect him from attack, of course, but it would enable him to fire back from the high ground. And, as a new President elected with a not quite filibuster-proof Senate, he would be in a better position to peel off the handful of Republican senators he would need to make meaningful legislative progress than someone who started from a defensive crouch. Hillary Clinton would make a competent, knowledgeable, and responsible President. Barack Obama just might make a transformative one."

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2008/02/11/080211taco_talk_hertzberg

And if Hillary gets elected that just means Rush Limbaugh will have a lot to say and I'm so tired of Republican blowhards who will have years of research to start out the next presidency with.

-T

Earl Cootie said...

I don't dislike him. I just don't know him. And, frankly, I see him as unknowable. We're expected to hope or to have faith that he'll heal the country. That Republicans will decide to reach across the aisle in this magical spirit of bipartisanship. Because they would have been doing that all along. They just didn't have the right person to inspire them to do so. Yeah. That's gotta be it.

Anonymous said...

JJ - I think the opinions you've stated come off as reactionary, and your polarizing critique is off-putting and extremist. Of course you are entitled to your opinion, but the voice you've used here may best be reserved for movie reviews and personal experiences; not a political canidate's character and intentions. (save that fear mongering role for Fox news)
I will thank you for causing me to take a harder look at who I support. I love ya, but I think your delivery here was miserable.

xo BG

jeremy said...

BG -
I love ya, too, and I'm sorry if you find my tone off-putting and my views "extremist" and "reactionary." My tone for all my posts is pretty consistent. Click on that label--titled "political'n'shit," no, less--and you'll find that my general tone has always been snarky. And how in the hell am I attacking his character? The article to which I link are documents recording the junior senator's ACTIONS (i.e. having a anti-gay pastor stump for him in the south, and voting for a liquified coal bill that is steeped in big business).
Then I merely ask for people to not jump on the feel-good express because he is an excellent orator and holds ridiculously nebulous ideas like "bringing people together" and "hope" and "change," and I point out that he spends money which does not exist.
And my final plea is just to compare the platforms of the two candidates and make a decision for YOURSELF.
Its not an attack. I just don't like the guy.